Court filing

ORDER RELATING CASES: 3:20-cv-04230-SK Mitchell v.… — Plaid Privacy (Dkt. 56)

Summary

A Related Case Order, Doc. 56, dated July 29, 2020 in Cottle v. Plaid Inc., No. 20-cv-03056-DMR, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, with a signature block naming Donna M. Ryu, United States Magistrate Judge. The order states that a Motion for Administrative Relief to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related has been filed and that the judge finds the more recently filed cases initialed below are related to the Cottle case and shall be reassigned. The listed cases are Mitchell v. Plaid Inc. (20-cv-04230-SK), Curtis v. Plaid Inc. (20-cv-04344-DMR), Anderson v. Plaid Inc. (20-cv-04480-JSC) and Evans v. Plaid Inc. (20-cv-04804-JSC). Future filings in any reassigned case must bear the initials of the newly assigned judge.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Filed July 29, 2020 in Plaid Privacy; one of 285 filings from this case.

Record facts

Court	U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Filed	2020-07-29

Cite this document

“ORDER RELATING CASES: 3:20-cv-04230-SK Mitchell v.… — Plaid Privacy (Dkt. 56).” U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 4:20-cv-03056-DMR, Doc. 56, filed 2020-07-29. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-plaid-privacy-cand-359040/2020-07-29-gov-uscourts-cand-359040-56-0-gov-uscourts-cand-359040-56-0/, SHA-256 644175d241ff9e70977d438f65712bce670f59e84c7fb5ddfb10db21bf040a04.

Search CourtListener for this docket number

Full text

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RELATED CASE ORDER

A Motion for Administrative Relief to Consider Whether Cases Should be Related or a
Sua Sponte Judicial Referral for Purpose of Determining Relationship (Civil L.R. 3-12) has been
filed. The time for filing an opposition or statement of support has passed. As the judge assigned
to case

20-cv-03056-DMR
Cottle v. Plaid Inc.

I find that the more recently filed case(s) that I have initialed below are related to the case
assigned to me, and such case(s) shall be reassigned to me. Any cases listed below that are not
related to the case assigned to me are referred to the judge assigned to the next-earliest filed case
for a related case determination.

Case
Title
Related
Not Related
20-cv-04230-SK
Mitchell v. Plaid Inc.
DMR
20-cv-04344-DMR Curtis v. Plaid Inc.
DMR
20-cv-04480-JSC
Anderson v. Plaid Inc.
DMR
20-cv-04804-JSC
Evans v. Plaid Inc.
DMR

ORDER

The parties are instructed that all future filings in any reassigned case are to bear the
initials of the newly assigned judge immediately after the case number. Any case management
conference in any reassigned case will be rescheduled by the Court. The parties shall adjust the
dates for the conference, disclosures and report required by FRCivP 16 and 26 accordingly.
Unless otherwise ordered, any dates for hearing noticed motions are vacated and must be re-
noticed by the moving party before the newly assigned judge; any deadlines set by the ADR Local
Rules remain in effect; and any deadlines established in a case management order continue to
govern, except dates for appearance in court, which will be rescheduled by the newly assigned
judge.

Dated: July 29, 2020
By:

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:20-cv-03056-DMR Document 56 Filed 07/29/20 Page 1 of 1

File and source

File: gov.uscourts.cand.359040.56.0.pdf
Size: 29,234 bytes
SHA-256: 644175d241ff9e70977d438f65712bce670f59e84c7fb5ddfb10db21bf040a04
Our copy: gov.uscourts.cand.359040.56.0.pdf
Original: PACER (login required)